snark: a (well-deserved) attitude of mocking irreverence and sarcasm

November 09, 2018

There's lots of ways to look at the results of last Tuesday's midterm election. But some ways are wrong -- like the attempt by Republicans to spin the election as a GOP win.

Today Ed Dover spoke the truth about the midterms at an engrossing Salem City Club presentation, "Patterns and Meanings of the 2018 National, Oregon, and Mid-Valley Elections." Dover is a retired Professor Emeritus at the Western Oregon University Department of Political Science and Public Administration.

This was Dover's 10th post-election talk to the Salem City Club.

I've heard a bunch of them. Dover has an astounding grasp of political details. He rattles off a rash of numbers, results, statistics, and such without ever checking his notes -- unless he's got an extra set of eyes that were hidden from view.

He started off by telling us that he prefers to focus on the House of Representatives, since all the House members are elected every two years, the number of people in each district is about the same, and it is a national election. The Senate and Governor races, by contrast, don't provide nearly as good an indicator of the nation's political mood.

Dover figures that the Democrats will pick up 35 seats in the House.

This is a conservative estimate since FiveThirtyEight projects a 37 seat gain. In the Senate, the Democrats had to defend 26 seats and the Republicans only nine. Still, Republicans are expected to gain only 1-3 seats.

(FiveThirtyEight predicts two, which will happen if the Arizona Senate race goes to the Democrat, who is leading at the moment, and if the Florida Senate race goes to the Republican, which seems likely, even with a recount.)

Democrats gained seven Governor seats, which brings them almost up to even with Republicans. Currently there are 23 Democratic Governors, 26 Republican Governors, and one race too close to call (Georgia).

This was a core message from Dover: it no longer makes sense to speak of "red states and blue states" (assuming it ever did). Rather, the Big Political Divide is between the suburbs and rural areas. All 38 House seats that Democrats flipped in the midterms were suburban districts.

The Dems lost three seats in rural areas, leaving them with Dover's estimated 35 seat gain, with several races undecided.

Politics, Dover said, follows Newton's Third Law: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. This leads to periodic realignments of the political landscape. The suburbs turning leftward, toward the Democrats, is the realignment much in evidence now.

Most of the 38 House districts flipped by Democrats were in the further out suburbs.

After his talk, Dover answered questions. One person asked why the Democrats didn't pick up any urban House seats, since big cities lean leftward. His (obvious) answer: those districts already are in the Democratic camp, and rural areas are strongly Republican, so the suburbs became the battlefield that Democrats won in the midterms.

Twenty-one of the 38 House seats flipped by Democrats were won by women. Even more, women dominated in volunteering for campaigns and donating money. College-educated women were especially prone to vote Democratic in the midterms. Why? Because they are repulsed by Trump and they care deeply about health care.

By contrast, the GOP has been pandering to the NRA and religious right, while being anti-immigrant and climate change deniers.

The same pattern, Dover said, has been evident in Oregon.

The suburbs have led to Oregon House Democrats picking up nine seats in the last four elections, with a net gain of eight seats. This year the Dems won three more seats -- women in the suburbs. Democrats are likely to keep those suburban seats, Dover said, citing Paul Evans as an example.

After the 2020 census, Oregon is expected to pick up an extra House seat (with West Virginia losing one). This seat will be in western Oregon. The boundaries of Oregon legislative seats also will change, with fewer seats in eastern Oregon.

Dover said that Democrats now have won 10 races for Governor in a row, even though Knute Buehler almost ran as a Democrat.

Regarding the statewide ballot measures, where all but the affordable housing measure failed, Dover observed that it is typical for the Pro side to spend money early, then run out of money late, when the Con side increases its spending.

Looking ahead to the 2020 presidential race, Texas, Georgia, and Arizona are close to becoming "majority minority" states, as California is now. Dover observed that Democrats got 48% in both the Texas Senate race and Georgia Governor race, and in Arizona the Democratic Senate candidate is leading.

So Democrats are going to have a wider political playing field in the next presidential election.

In responding to questions, one of which I asked, Dover said:

-- When it comes to recounts, and voting generally, too many states are using 19th century technology, like punch cards. Counties have to pay for elections, and many are broke. So states and the federal government should pay for modernizing voting.

-- Florida is a strange state, as is Ohio. Their demographics are more important politically than who the Governor is. In various parts of Florida, you can find demographics similar to the Deep South, the Caribbean, Midwest, and East Coast -- because these parts attract people who move to Florida from those places.

-- The infamous "caravan" is being driven by people in central America impacted by climate change, as well as drug violence.

-- Though the Electoral College makes little sense, and is undemocratic (small population states get more votes per capita than large population states), nothing will change until Republicans lose a couple of presidential elections where they won the popular vote, as has happened to Democrats twice recently (Al Gore and Hillary Clinton).

-- Same-day voter registration doesn't make much of a difference, since people who fail to register weeks or months before an election probably won't register the day of an election.

-- MY QUESTION: Why are so many elections so darn close? Like almost 50-50. Does this have something to do with the action-reaction thing? Dover said that incumbents are hard to beat, but I didn't find this answer very satisfying, though it was true. After I asked it, a man sitting in front of me turned around and showed me what he'd written in his notebook: "Evolution."

Naturally I was curious about what he meant, so I spoke with him after Dover finished.

His idea is that we humans need each other, and we need variety -- like both liberals and conservatives. So the political pendulum swings back and forth, leftward and rightward, often landing right in the middle in races. In general, this makes sense to me.

I also like the action-reaction explanation, which fits with a pendulum analogy. When things go too far in one direction, like the crazy conservatism of Donald Trump, there's a desire among Americans to get things more in balance. As is well known, this typically happens in midterms, with the party that doesn't hold the presidency picking up seats in Congress.

November 07, 2018

In a Washington Post piece I read today, I saw a saying: "Republicans are naturally triumphal even when they lose and Democrats tend to get depressed even when they win."

This seems generally true.

But like I said last night, I'm pleased with how the midterm election turned out. Sure, it was distressing to see Andrew Gillum, Stacey Abrams, and Beto O'Rourke fail to win their races. But here in Oregon we enjoyed a genuine Blue Wave, and Democrats taking control of the House of Representatives is a really big deal.

Plus, even though currently Democrats are down three Senate seats -- Republicans flipped North Dakota, Indiana, Florida, and Missouri, while the Dems flipped Nevada -- there's a lot of votes left to be counted in Arizona, so there's a decent chance that Sinema could overcome McSally's lead, which would reduce the Democrat net loss to two. That'd be a good outcome for the Dems, given how many seats they had to defend in Trump territory.

But this barely scratches the surface of the progressive wonderful'ness that marked yesterday's midterm results.

Here's links, and an excerpt from each, of informed commentary I came across today that should cheer up anyone who believes the Democrats didn't fare very well in the midterms.

First, an encouraging tweet from Nate Silver. It shows that if a presidential election happened with which party won the popular midterm vote in each state, the Democrat would have won the presidency with 314 electoral votes. Great news for 2020!

Then there's a way-cool New York Times analysis of how the vote in each congressional district changed in comparison to 2016. A blue arrow pointing left, not surprisingly, indicates a shift toward the Democratic party. A red arrow pointing right indicates a shift toward the Republican party. The length of the arrow shows the degree of the shift.

The online story has some animations to it, plus some additional maps. Keep in mind that the story says only 30 districts actually flipped from red to blue (so far). This image only shows the direction of the shift: several dozen districts became more Republican, while 317 districts shifted toward the Democrats.

For us progressive Oregonians, the marked blue shift in eastern Oregon is encouraging. Even though Republican Greg Walden won re-election, his Democrat opponent did much better than Clinton did in 2016.

The 2018 elections are being widely painted as a “split decision” for President Trump — Democrats won the House while losing seats in the Senate — but this framing actually undercuts just how much there is for Democrats and progressives to celebrate about the results.

Three of the biggest narratives driving our politics now lie in ruins, and their deaths carry important implications for the future of the Trump presidency, public opinion in the Trump era, and the character of our country.

Trump has magical political powers, and his lies are “working.”...Democrats have no answer to the nationalist backlash...Democrats can’t assemble a multi-racial majority to confront Trumpism.

There’s a strange character to the post-election analyses of the moment, in which a wave election for Democrats where they won back the House of Representatives is being characterized as something like half a win. That’s partly because a number of dynamic young Democrats who had raised perhaps unreasonable hopes for victory fell short, but it’s also because Republicans are naturally triumphal even when they lose and Democrats tend to get depressed even when they win.

So in order to put the election in perspective, I’d like to widen our gaze beyond a few Senate and House races and look at some of the other results, particularly at the state level. When you do that, you see that Democrats have an awful lot to be happy about even beyond taking the House. Let’s break it down.

Democrats won in key governor’s races. While much of the attention was focused on the campaigns of Andrew Gillum in Florida and Stacey Abrams in Georgia, both of which fell just short (though Abrams still hopes to force her opponent into a runoff), Democrats won a bunch of key governor’s races around the country. They flipped seven seats: Nevada, New Mexico, Kansas, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois and Maine.

...Democrats won big in state legislatures. You’ve probably heard that over the eight years Barack Obama was president, Democrats lost a net of almost a thousand seats in state legislatures. Which is bad, but last night Democrats gained about 300 seats, so they’re well on their way to reversing those losses.

...Democratic women won everywhere. As of now, 95 women have won or are projected to win seats in the House, 82 of whom are Democrats. That includes the first two Muslim American women and the first two Native American women; a record number of women of color will be serving in the next Congress.

...Americans’ health care won big. Voters in the conservative states of Idaho, Nebraska and Utah passed ballot initiatives to accept the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of Medicaid, which will bring coverage to hundreds of thousands of their citizens.

This really was a blue wave. There’s no question that Republicans won some key victories, but that shouldn’t distract us from just how big a blue wave this was — even if gerrymandering and geography helped contain its effects.

November 06, 2018

A few days ago I predicted how I'd feel given certain results of today's midterm election. Below I've highlighted in green the outcomes that became reality. I added the Beto O'Rourke loss to the last two scenarios, having neglected to include it in my original post.

You can see that right now -- 10:07 pm -- I thought I'd be in a mood of Sad, but things could have been worse. But actually I'm feeling Happy, though mildly disappointed. Here's my best guess why.

(It has to be a guess, because it's difficult to pin down emotions.)

First, I spent a lot of time this evening flipping back and forth between MSNBC and CNN. So I heard the commentators discussing what Democratic control of the House of Representatives means. In short, it's a big deal.

Subpoena power. Ability to conduct investigations into Trump administration misdeeds. Veto power over legislation. A much louder voice for Democrats on the national stage.

Sure, it would have been good if the Democrats could have held onto Senate seats in Indiana, North Dakota, and Missouri.

But those are red states. Not long ago there was talk of Democrats losing as many as eight Senate seats in states that went for Trump. So tonight's Senate outcome isn't that bad. And as I write this the Nevada and Arizona races are still up in the air, which could be Democratic pickups.

However, seeing that Kate Brown easily won re-election as Governor, and that each of the "bad" ballot measures (103-106) appear to have been defeated handily, with the "good" affordable housing measure (102) passing, made me feel happy that I live in a progressive-leaning state where voters usually make wise decisions.

Sad, but things could have been worseDemocrats win the House, but not the SenateKate Brown re-elected Governor of OregonBeto O'Rourke loses to Ted Cruz Stacey Abrams loses race for Governor of GeorgiaAndrew Gillum loses race for Governor of FloridaOregon voters protect abortion rights and sanctuary state status

November 03, 2018

Looking back, I realize that my despair over Trump beating Clinton in the 2016 election was caused in part by my failure to anticipate what I thought was unthinkable: Donald Trump becoming the President of the United States.

So this time around, I'm going to envision various emotional states of mind I might be in late Tuesday night -- election day -- or on Wednesday morning, if voting results of the races I most care about aren't all in before I go to bed.

I need to say that while I just said races I most care about, the absence of certain races from the following emotional forecasts doesn't mean that I don't care a lot about them.

For example, I'll be really happy if Shelaswau Crier and Bill Burgess win their races for Marion County Commissioner here in Oregon. Ditto if Danny Jaffer wins his Oregon house race.

I'm simply aware that the results of these local races don't have quite the same emotional pull for me -- probably because these seats have been held by Republicans for quite a while, so if Democrats fail to win this time, it won't be a big surprise or major disappointment for me.

So here's my projected emotional frame of mind given various election outcomes.

Sad, but things could have been worseDemocrats win the House, but not the SenateKate Brown re-elected Governor of OregonStacey Abrams loses race for Governor of GeorgiaAndrew Gillum loses race for Governor of FloridaOregon voters protect abortion rights and sanctuary state status

Deep depressionDemocrats lose both the House and SenateKate Brown loses Governor race to Knute BuehlerStacey Abrams loses race for Governor of GeorgiaAndrew Gillum loses race for Governor of FloridaOregon voters turn down abortion rights and sanctuary state status

Of course, likely there will be "mix and match" in the actual outcome of next Tuesday's election results. My emotional state could be improved, for example, if Crier, Burgess, or Jaffer win their races. And while it is very unlikely that control of the Oregon House or Senate is turned over to the Republicans, if the GOP gains some seats, this would be a downer.

I'm betting that Happy, though mildly disappointed most likely is going to be how I'll feel after the midterms.

Each of the outcomes I listed in that category seems eminently possible. And if Iowa's right-wing-wacko House member, Steve King, somehow loses his race, that would take away the "mildly disappointed."

October 22, 2018

Since I have a blog called Salem Political Snark, it's dawned on me that I should be making endorsements for both local and statewide races, plus Oregon ballot measures.

This doesn't mean anybody will pay attention to what I say, but us bloggers don't do what we do because we believe we're influential. We just can't help ourselves, being addicted to putting what's going on inside our head into words on a computer screen, then onto the Internet where others can eavesdrop on the state of our psyche.

So here's how I'm feeling two weeks before the midterm election on November 6.

Short version: Vote for every Democrat on the ballot. Plus, vote "yes" on Measure 102 and "no" on the other measures. Regarding other choices on the ballot, like judges, use your best, um, judgement.

Long version: So why am I being so incredibly tribalistic in urging people to vote for every Democrat over every Republican and third-party candidate?

Because this is no ordinary election. Donald Trump is no ordinary president. And the G.O.P. that Trump unquestionably has become the leader of is no ordinary political party.

In that post I noted that the authors of How Democracies Die advised against engaging in hardball tactics against Trump, based on their familiarity with what has worked in other countries facing similar threats against democratic institutions. (Note the small "d.")

But voting for Democrats isn't at all a hardball tactic. It's simply the best way for the United States to begin digging its way out of the messy, smelly, unpleasant hole Trump and his Republican cronies have gotten us into.

Everybody has their own favorite description of the crap that lies in this hole.

Mine is lying, disrespect for the truth, trashing reality. To me this is the biggest danger Trumpism poses to the United States, and to the entire world. Without a core concern for shared facts, both societal and scientific, politics has no foundation for wise decision-making, bipartisan or otherwise.

Trump, though, is an almost non-stop liar. Bernstein said this has been Trump's modus operandi throughout his business career, and he's stepped up his lying after becoming president. We've never had a president with such little regard for the truth.

Or a president so uncaring, so lacking in compassion, so egotistical. (At least in modern times.)

Few Republicans are willing to stand up against Trump's constant assaults on our shared reality. This is why it is so important to elect Democrats this November. No Republican can be counted on to serve as a counter-weight to Trump.

And for sure this includes Oregon's Republican candidate for Governor, Knute Buehler. So vote for Kate Brown. On health care, climate change, women's rights, and so much else, Brown will continue to be on the side of ordinary Oregonians, not special interests.

Every Republican running for office, both locally and statewide, had to be approved in a primary by members of their party who are avidly pro-Trump. Thus there's no way any Republican on the ballot can be trusted to do what's right for Oregonians, since they're committed to doing what Trump wants.

Today Senator Kamala Harris gave a talk in Iowa where she said, "This is the moment in time that is requiring us to fight for the best of who we are... We are better than this."

Yes, we are. We're way better than Donald Trump and his lying ways. So let's send a message in the form of a Big Blue Wave on November 6.

October 15, 2018

Vote for Democrats in the November 2018 election. I was convinced of this before our doorbell rang a couple of hours ago, but I'm even more convinced after chatting with Danny Jaffer, who is running to represent Oregon House District 23.

My wife, Laurel, has been hand writing postcards urging our neighbors out here in rural south Salem to vote for Jaffer. So I'd heard his name, and knew he was running against Republican Mike Nearman. That was it, though.

Talking with Jaffer about his background and why he thinks he can win left me with a really good feeling.

Here's one side of the flyer he left with me. Note that Jaffer is a 20 year Navy veteran. He served in Operation Desert Shield, Operation Desert Storm, and the Global War on Terrorism.

What's not to like, House District 23 voters? Put more positively, I really liked Jaffer's statement about Oregon Forward on his campaign web site.

Oregon Forward is a movement built on the idea that Oregonians can and should work together to create a healthier, cleaner, and more prosperous community for everyone. Oregon Forward is also a rejection of the dirty politics of fear and intolerance which serve only the interests of deep-pocketed special interests, not you and me.

Whether you’re conservative, liberal, or just fed up with politics altogether, the Oregon Forward campaign seeks to make your voice and your interest the focal point of everything we do. A vote for Danny Jaffer is a vote to strip the power of extreme special interests and return power to everyday Oregonians, where it belongs.

Nicely said.

I think just about everybody agrees that the tone of today's national politics is disgusting. I'm a political junkie, but it's getter harder and harder for me to listen to the news when I'm driving around. I get fed up with the constant bickering, backbiting, and blather -- to name a few "B's" that come to mind.

Jaffer struck me as a nice straightforward guy. He must have made lots of house calls in the past weeks and months, but while talking to him I didn't feel that anything he said was canned or scripted.

By contrast, consider this excerpt from a Statesman Journal story about the Jaffer-Nearman race (there's also a Libertarian candidate). It followed numerous quotes from Jaffer, including his observation that Nearman doesn't champion issues important to his community.

Nearman did not respond to multiple requests for an interview. After being contacted by the Statesman Journal, Nearman hung up his phone and did not answer subsequent calls and emails.

Wow. No wonder Mike Nearman hasn't done much for the people in House District 23. Nearman doesn't want to talk about the issues that voters care about, not even to a Statesman Journal reporter who wants to give him a newspaper soapbox.

Maybe Nearman, like Donald Trump, considers journalists "enemies of the people." A letter to the editor in the Corvallis Gazette-Times raised this possibility.

As the midterm elections approach, I asked myself: "Who is Rep. Mike Nearman and who does he really represent?"

After searching the Democrat-Herald's website for "Mike Nearman," I found just three brief listings, one announcing his plan to run for re-election this year, and two others about the same meeting he planned to attend.

I also read in the Salem paper that Mike Nearman refused to conduct an interview and hung up the phone on the reporter.

This is the opposite behavior we need from our Oregon state House representative from the 23rd District. We need absolute transparency and effective communication practices such as using and respecting the media. The media are not the enemy of the people. This, combined with his voting to eliminate school lunches and against net neutrality, smacks of someone in the pocket of special interests.

Look, I'm not saying that Democrats are politically perfect. But I do strongly believe that Democrats are more likely to stand up for the interests of the general public than Republicans, since the GOP typically tilts toward special interests such as giant corporations.

I'm familiar with the saying, "All politics is local." However, that used to be way more true than it is today. Donald Trump views the upcoming mid-term elections as a referendum about himself. He wants one-party rule, the Republican party, which he is the leader of.

Democrats like Danny Jaffer see things differently. They want the people to rule, not a party, nor one Supreme Leader. That's why I'm voting for Democrats on November 6. I encourage everybody to do the same.